Personally I couldn't give a monkeys about Hero Abilities, in the same way I don't care about additional res-chances, monster points or any of the other "rewards" that have been dished out that some people have raised concerns over. My reasoning - it's a team game. If this was a PvP game where you had frequent party conflict then yes worrying about balancing characters fairly would be vital. As it is however it only benefits me that people have all sorts of special powers and skills as 90% of the time they are going to be using them to my ultimate benefit. Anyone worried that their character isn't going to be as "special" anymore is just entering into a c*ck waving contest anyway and if they are really worried they can always do all the events too after all they have a head start so in theory with effort no-one can catch them now

Being named hero? I can think of at least 2 Heroquests I have been involved in where I didn't believe that the title of hero was deserved however the abilities being learned by the various characters were entirely in keeping with the ongoing plot.

As Jem has stated "it is a time of heroes" threats to the Valley peoples are growing in frequency and everyones got to muck in.

Oh and to the example of a triple hero at rank 50 and six times hero at rank 80. . . if anyone gets through 6 heroquests by rank 80 and isn't perm dead. . they can call themselves whatever they want in my book!

portilis wrote:I'm not entirely sure about the entire "year-based" limit though, I think it should be something more based around in-character limits than out-of-character timing - some people will have years where they can afford the cash and time to make all the heroquests and years where they can't make any, and it seems a little unfair to base it on that. Possibly on a total quantity of HQs played rather than year based though?

Sure. Then one could have ability credits which could be spent in the future...

shaunmcnally wrote:Anyone worried that their character isn't going to be as "special" anymore is just entering into a c*ck waving contest anyway and if they are really worried they can always do all the events too after all they have a head start so in theory with effort no-one can catch them now

It's not about that, for exactly the reason you say.

It's about the integrity of the history of the system and campaign ( A ), and the enjoyment of lower level/newer players (and indeed some older players too) ( B ) in relation to the challenge.

Jem suggested one way to deal with ( A ); Fraser has suggested a way to deal with ( B ).

Oh and to the example of a triple hero at rank 50 and six times hero at rank 80. . . if anyone gets through 6 heroquests by rank 80 and isn't perm dead. . they can call themselves whatever they want in my book!

Sure. But the assumption made, e.g. by Fraser and me, is that this is not difficult to do given the status quo. Do you disagree?

On reflection I guess I am not too bothered about people picking up multiple hero abilities.

I think the issue is arising as we are fundamentally changing the nature of what it means to be a 'hero'. Noone is arguing (I believe) that the actions taken by those on the adventure are going to be any less than heroic than before. The difference is that once upon a time, a character would usually be involved in a 2-year campaign before they participated in the HeroQuest. Okay there were some people who turned up for the first time on the pre-HQ (which I have done too, but personally I'd have been happy not to have been called 'hero' for that) but it referred to an ongoing and perservering effort in order to defeat some nebulous force, rather than 4-5 days of fighting (where one may not necessarily have been at one's best ). Thus, the "title" originally conveyed all that effort of years of work as opposed to a week's!

However, I understand that the operating model of HQ has changed & I am supportive of the efforts of Otherways to work in the best interests of the club, which may have to mean that people can be named a 'hero' three times a year.

It's about the integrity of the history of the system and campaign ( A ), and the enjoyment of lower level/newer players (and indeed some older players too) ( B ) in relation to the challenge.

Why does the changing of the "status quo" affect the past campaign integrity. Surely the fact that new abilities are manifesting more often (and in a more logical, ordered fashion) is an IC occurance as well. Perhaps we should be investigating whether the spheres are aligning or some other cosmically significant event?

The same stands true with the title of Hero. Perhaps some old heroes should get together and decide that "these young whippersnappers wouldn't have cut the mustard in our day" and put a formal protest into the powers that be that their exploits are being forgetten in the light of the new regime.

I am not sure quite where you are coming from in relation to enjoyment vs. challenge. Are you saying that it comes to easy to new players? or that old players are going to be put off by the "easy win" new approach to hero-ship?

But the assumption made, e.g. by Fraser and me, is that this is not difficult to do given the status quo. Do you disagree?

Which is just that, an assumption. This is the first year that there have been 3 heroquests under "new management" as it were and we have yet to see what it's going to be like. We'll all be laughing on the other side of our faces in May if the entire party is perm-killed on day two

In the past there have been some wildly differing death tallys on Herquests. Fraser has given one example. I'd be interested to know the other results. I know that the Sethenia HQ was relatively "light" in terms of death and I am sure some of the others have been too.

Here's a third option. Get rid of the title of Hero all together and instead have a seperate title for each 5 day like the old celtic boast system.
- Destroyer of the Darkwind
- White Side Victor
- Agothian Slayer
- Doom of the Nazgul
- Broker of Wolfhold Peace
- Honoury Guard of the Wizards Concillium
- Dreadlord
All sorts of optins that actually link back to what you did.

Of course Drow will like it best heh heh

One more thing to think about in an already completely off-tanget thread. How do you feel about special abilities that have been given out to various characters that are not related to Hero abilities? I can think of some completely sick ones over the past few years such as 1 less power for all Good invocations, access to red magic without needing to join the guild (even as a 3rd colour fore none mages)? There were no titles associated with these skills but new players are never likely to get hold of them again.

Thus, the "title" originally conveyed all that effort of years of work as opposed to a week's!

I believe that this makes a great deal of sense and I actually think that there are moves to ensure that this does happen. The entire year (and the end of last year) has a fairly solid plot thread throughout it (Agoth in case you missed it ) meaning that anyone christened Hero this year will likely have spent most of their time battling against a long-time foe.

Bear in mind that one of the biggest complaints over the past few years is that certain of the Heroquest campaigns felt exclusive to certain characters or groups which meant that in some circles people felt unable to get involved in that years HQ and the lead ups meaning less players and often less monsters even when the events were excellent.

Perhaps the title of Hero will be awarded once this year to everyone involved in the defeat of Agoth (assuming we do defeat it!).

I think Hero status and Hero abilities need to be seperated. That way, you can get a nice ability for doing five day - I think there should be some extra reward you can't get any other way as it is an extra challenge.

The title of "Hero" or indeed Shaun's idea of having some appropriate IC title should be viewed a bit like a Victoria Cross - in other words it can only be obtained through some outstanding IC effort by anyone on any adventure. An example from this weekend might be Tersuis giving his life to santifiy the Grove.

I don't think it should be available to people just cause they can afford to go on a 5 day. I'd be more than happy to give Garrets back, as I'm not sure it makes sense to get granted the title Hero for saying "Sod the Valley, we're in it for the Great Elf Treasure!" (I'm keeping the ability though )

I am not sure quite where you are coming from in relation to enjoyment vs. challenge. Are you saying that it comes to easy to new players? or that old players are going to be put off by the "easy win" new approach to hero-ship?

A bit of both.

And yes, this does overlap slightly with the IC issues...

"But the assumption made, e.g. by Fraser and me, is that this is not difficult to do given the status quo. Do you disagree?"

Which is just that, an assumption. This is the first year that there have been 3 heroquests under "new management" as it were and we have yet to see what it's going to be like. We'll all be laughing on the other side of our faces in May if the entire party is perm-killed on day two

I seem to remember you saying, during a phone conversation, that you thought that there hadn't been enough deaths recently.

Yes, that may change. I think we're just saying that we'd like it to. (And obviously I'm relying only on what I've been told, here!) Is that right?

One more thing to think about in an already completely off-tanget thread. How do you feel about special abilities that have been given out to various characters that are not related to Hero abilities? I can think of some completely sick ones over the past few years such as 1 less power for all Good invocations, access to red magic without needing to join the guild (even as a 3rd colour fore none mages)? There were no titles associated with these skills but new players are never likely to get hold of them again.

I am guessing that this will stop happening now that there are more HQs?

This reminds me of the old candle making ability that I'd forgotten about! Heheheh...